Nobody, but nobody is trying to pick a fight with China proper.
Even with the Pacific Pivot the US (regional allies and friends included) is merely trying to search for a believable, meaningful and stable strategic balance so that incentives to pursue perceived self-interests outside international conventions, law and peaceful means remain as low as possible. Historically, some existing islands and shoals have been claimed by rickety settlements though even these acts' ramifications are highly questionable and inevitably transient in nature. Practically all of the circling nations have some unjustifiable claims over "rights" in the South China Sea (usually bilateral and symmetric tit-for-tat spats) but none more blatant, all- encompassing and absurd than China.
Their claim, the so-called "Nine-dotted line" which encompasses practically the whole sea - including, one might add, every other nations' well established economic areas, clearly and unequivocally demarcated by international maritime law - has no real precedent nor justification. At best it's a complete fabrication by the Republic of China (pre-1949), arbitrarily adopted by the People's Republic. Approached for comment or explanation various Chinese authorities have never managed or bothered to elucidate their position in any meaningful way at all. They just state it and actually inflate the claims even further.
Adding "land" by dredging only underlines this fabrication and is a direct and overt challenge, not only of other South China Sea nations, but of international law and conventions writ large. Or a practical, physical, consequential translation of a heretofore hypothetical, argumentative (if absurd) construct. Or, to put it into yet other words, a return to geopolitics backed by force alone. The parallel to the annexation of Crimea and the occupation of eastern Ukraine by Russia is clear. It is in keeping, and strengthening, a trend which disregards and destroys both the immediate and the future interests (self-determination, prosperity) of the absolute majority of people almost irrespective of their current circumstances, for the sake of the relative power of a very few.
Which is why PLA/-N's unprecedented actions go well beyond a "worrying signal".
This should not be mistaken for a negotiation.
It is mind-boggling (with for example the complete overhaul of the mainland economy and infrastructure, both of which are manifestly sustainable only through a sufficiently integrated and functional global economy) that the leadership of China should see this as being in their interest, short- or long term. But unless they act in random, somehow they do. Any reaction should recognize and be at least commensurate with this.
Every rational actor bordering the South China Sea (and by extension everyone whose trade routes traverse the area) has every interest to keep shipping lanes open for business. The natural resources inherent to the sea/ -bed can, China and everyone else willing, can be jointly managed by existing conventions and law. If any one actor tries to deny this then all should be equally denied until such a time the matter can be resolved through joint, equal normative diplomacy.
At least some of the largest energy companies have strategies with regard to humanity's capacity to evolve or transition our energy and material flows from finite to circular - orderly and chaotic ones. Sadly, this South China Sea development, among others, points to the latter option. Again, the ramifications extend way beyond the region.
For example, Carl Bildt, fmr. prime and foreign minister of Sweden, participating in the 14th Asia Security Summit (29 - 31 May, 2015, also known as the "Shangri-la dialogue")
tweeted this on the 30th:
"Time to hope China would be 'responsible stakeholder' in international system over. Now question is what they will seek to change. #SLD15"
Pretty concisely and definitively put.
